Filed: Jul. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER EDWARD G. SMITH , District Judge . AND NOW this 27th day of July, 2018, after considering the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Arcadia Recovery Bureau, LLC (Doc. No. 39), the response in opposition to the motion filed by the plaintiff, Michelle W. Vullings, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated (Doc. No. 42), and the defendant's reply to the response in opposition (Doc. No. 46), and the applicable record; and for the reasons stated in the separat
Summary: ORDER EDWARD G. SMITH , District Judge . AND NOW this 27th day of July, 2018, after considering the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Arcadia Recovery Bureau, LLC (Doc. No. 39), the response in opposition to the motion filed by the plaintiff, Michelle W. Vullings, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated (Doc. No. 42), and the defendant's reply to the response in opposition (Doc. No. 46), and the applicable record; and for the reasons stated in the separate..
More
ORDER
EDWARD G. SMITH, District Judge.
AND NOW this 27th day of July, 2018, after considering the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant, Arcadia Recovery Bureau, LLC (Doc. No. 39), the response in opposition to the motion filed by the plaintiff, Michelle W. Vullings, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated (Doc. No. 42), and the defendant's reply to the response in opposition (Doc. No. 46), and the applicable record; and for the reasons stated in the separately filed memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 39) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
1. The motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as to the plaintiff's claims based upon the following sections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: 15 U.S.C. § 1692d; 15 U.S.C. § 1692f; 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(8); and 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)(3). Judgment is entered in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff as to the claims under sections 1692d and 1692f. The claims under sections 1692f(8) and 1692g(a)(3) are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; and
2. The motion is DENIED as to the plaintiff's claims based upon 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.
